Search

Women’s participation in field collision sports is growing worldwide. Scoping reviews provide an overview of scientific literature in a developing area to support practitioners, policy, and research priorities. Our aim is to explore published research and synthesise information on the physical and technical demands and preparation strategies of female field collision sports. We searched four databases and identified relevant published studies. Data were extracted to form (1) a numerical analysis and (2) thematic summary. Of 2318 records identified, 43 studies met the inclusion criteria. Physical demands were the most highly investigated (n+=+24), followed by technical demands (n+= 18), tactical considerations (n+=+8) and preparatory strategies (n=1). The key themes embody a holistic model contributing to both performance and injury prevention outcomes in the context of female field collision sports. Findings suggest a gender data gap across all themes and a low evidence base to inform those preparing female athletes for match demands. Given the physical and technical differences in match-demands the review findings do not support the generalisation of male-derived training data to female athletes. To support key stakeholders working within female field collision sports there is a need to increase the visibility of female athletes in the literature.

PurposeTo synthesise evidence on low back pain (LBP) in adult rowers and to create a consensus statement to inform clinical practice.MethodsThere were four synthesis steps that informed the consensus statement. In step one, seven expert clinicians and researchers established the scope of the consensus statement and conducted a survey of experienced and expert clinicians to explore current practice. In step two, working groups examined current evidence relating to key scope questions and summarised key issues. In step three, we synthesised evidence for each group and used a modified Delphi process to aid in the creation of the overall consensus statements. Finally, in step four, we combined information from step three with the findings of the clinician survey (and with athlete and coach input) to produce recommendations for clinical practice.ResultsThe scope of the consensus statement included epidemiology; biomechanics; management; the athlete’s voice and clinical expertise. Prevention and management of LBP in rowers should include education on risk factors, rowing biomechanics and training load. If treatment is needed, non-invasive management, including early unloading from aggravating activities, effective pain control and exercise therapy should be considered. Fitness should be maintained with load management and progression to full training and competition. The role of surgery is unclear. Management should be athlete focused and a culture of openness within the team encouraged.ConclusionRecommendations are based on current evidence and consensus and aligned with international LBP guidelines in non-athletic populations, but with advice aimed specifically at rowers. We recommend that research in relation to all aspects of prevention and management of LBP in rowers be intensified.

The last decade has seen a dramatic rise in sports science research due to the ever-increasing professionalization of sport. As a result, many alternative training methodologies that challenge traditional training philosophies have emerged. In the sport of swimming, ultra-short race-pace training (USRPT) was recently proposed. The aim of this article was to provide current perspectives on USRPT in competitive swimming. A systematic review was conducted to determine the effects of USRPT on performance in competitive swimmers. Of the 1347 studies retrieved, 1332 were excluded. The full-texts of 15 studies were assessed for eligibility. However, all 15 studies were excluded as the intervention did not consist of USRPT. Consequently, there are concerns surrounding USRPT as it is not currently based on peer-reviewed published literature. In addition, the recommendations within USRPT to avoid resistance training, cross-training activities, training intensities less than race-pace velocity and part practice swimming drills are highly controversial and lack scientific evidence. There is evidence to suggest that USRPT is a derivative of high-intensity training (HIT) and there is peer-reviewed published literature available to support the effects of HIT on performance in competitive swimmers. Swimming coaches and sports scientists are advised to consider the applications of USRPT with caution. The authors suggest that USRPT is a training method, which may be incorporated within a holistic periodized training program that includes a variety of training methods and stimuli. Future research should involve a randomized controlled intervention of USRPT in competitive swimmers.

The debate over low-volume, high-intensity training versus high-volume, low-intensity training, commonly known as Quality versus Quantity, respectively, is a frequent topic of discussion among swimming coaches and academics. The aim of this study was to explore expert coaches’ perceptions of quality and quantity coaching philosophies in competitive swimming and to investigate their current training practices. A purposeful sample of 11 expert swimming coaches was recruited for this study. The study was a mixed methods design and involved each coach participating in 1 semi-structured interview and completing 1 closed-ended questionnaire. The main findings of this study were that coaches felt quality training programmes would lead to short term results for youth swimmers, but were in many cases more appropriate for senior swimmers. The coaches suggested that quantity training programmes built an aerobic base for youth swimmers, promoted technical development through a focus on slower swimming and helped to enhance recovery from training or competition. However, the coaches continuously suggested that quantity training programmes must be performed with good technique and they felt this was a misunderstood element. This study was a critical step towards gaining a richer and broader understanding on the debate over Quality versus Quantity training from an expert swimming coaches’ perspective which was not currently available in the research literature.

BACKGROUND The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of increased training volume during a 10-day training camp on competitive performance and internal training load (ITL). In addition, coach and swimmer rating of perceived exertion (RPE) for each session was compared. METHODS Ten national level swimmers (gender: 4 males and 6 females; age: 15±1 years; height: 170.5±6.4 cm; body mass: 61.4±7.4 kg) participated in the training camp which involved a 36% increase in swimming volume. Competitive performance, as assessed using the FPS (FINA points system), was recorded pre and post-camp. ITL was recorded using the Session-RPE method and RESTQ-52 Sport questionnaire for each session and for day 1, 5 and 10 of the camp, respectively. Coach RPE was recorded after each training session for coach-swimmer RPE comparisons. RESULTS Competitive performance increased by 7.1% from pre-camp to post-camp (P=0.001, dz=1.6). Session-RPE increased between day 1 and all other days of the training camp (P

To assess the effects of a 7-wk low-volume, high-intensity training (HIT) intervention on performance parameters in national-level youth swimmers.Sixteen swimmers (age 15.8 [1.0] y, age at peak height velocity 12.9 [0.6] y, 100-m freestyle 61.4 [4.1] s) were randomly assigned to an HIT group or a low-intensity, high-volume training (HVT) group that acted as a control. The HIT group reduced their weekly training volume of zone 1 (low-intensity) training by 50% but increased zone 3 (high-intensity) training by 200%. The HVT group performed training as normal. Pretest to posttest measures of physiological performance (velocity at 2.5- and 4-mM blood lactate [velocityThere were no significant 3-way interactions between time, group, and sex for all performance parameters (P .05). There was a significant 2-way interaction between time and group for velocityA 7-wk HIT intervention was neither beneficial nor detrimental to performance parameters; however, the HIT group completed 6 h (17.0 km) of swimming per week compared with 12 h (33.4 km) per week for the HVT group.

Nugent, FJ, Comyns, TM, Burrows, E, and Warrington, GD. Effects of low-volume, high-intensity training on performance in competitive swimmers: a systematic review. J Strength Cond Res 31(3): 837-847, 2017-The purpose of this systematic review was to examine the extent and quality of the current research literature to determine the effects of low-volume, high-intensity training (HIT) on physiological performance and swimming performance in competitive swimmers. The methodology followed the preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocol. A search of relevant databases and conference proceedings was performed until December 2015. The inclusion criteria were (a) competitive swimmers, (b) ≥4 weeks HIT intervention, (c) comparison group had to involve a higher training volume, (d) outcome measures of physiological and swimming performance, and (e) all experimental study designs. Quality assessment was performed using the Quality Index checklist. Results indicate that of the 538 studies retrieved, 7 studies met the inclusion criteria. Six of the 7 studies found that an HIT intervention resulted in significant improvements in physiological performance. Four of the 7 studies found that HIT resulted in significant improvements in swimming performance, whereas none of the 7 studies resulted in a reduction in physiological or swimming performance. Despite the positive findings of this review, the short study duration is a limitation to a number of studies. The current evidence on the effects of HIT on performance is promising; however, it is difficult to draw accurate conclusions until further research has been conducted.